Metro Atlanta is preparing to put a number on its housing future.
On Thursday, November 12, the Atlanta Regional Commission is scheduled to consider adopting Housing Forward 2035, a regional strategy calling for 367,000 additional homes by 2035 across its 11-county planning area.
The number is large because the region expects to add approximately 350,000 households and 396,000 jobs between 2020 and 2035. ARC’s calculation also assumes that a healthy housing market needs a 5% vacancy rate, rather than having nearly every home occupied at all times. The target is therefore a planning estimate, not a promise that 367,000 homes will automatically be built.
That distinction is the central issue. Metro Atlanta may be moving toward a regional approach to housing, but a regional target will matter only if local governments can turn it into completed, occupied and affordable homes.
The shortage is not only about the number of units
ARC’s strategy says current development patterns would produce only about one-quarter of the housing needed for households earning $55,000 or less, roughly half of the area median income. Those households would generally need monthly housing costs of about $1,300 or less to avoid being cost-burdened.
The strategy also identifies more than 200,000 homes that are currently missing from the region’s affordable and available supply for households at that income level. It calls for the region to reduce that affordability gap by 50% for households earning 50% of area median income and below.
That is a different challenge from simply building more market-rate apartments or single-family homes. New supply can help a housing market function, but it does not mean that workers earning modest wages can afford the new homes, remain in existing neighborhoods or avoid long commutes.
The problem is visible in ARC’s latest public-opinion data. In the 2026 Metro Atlanta Speaks survey, 30% of respondents identified housing affordability as the region’s biggest problem. Fifty-one percent said housing costs were a major barrier to economic mobility, while 32% said very few or no good jobs matching their skills were available within a reasonable commute.
Those responses do not prove that the proposed strategy will improve mobility. They do show why the housing discussion cannot be separated from transportation, job access and household finances.
Location will determine whether growth helps
ARC’s strategy warns that growth under current patterns will continue moving outward, farther from job centers and infrastructure. By 2035, the agency projects that approximately 80% of new households could face commutes longer than 30 minutes, while only about one-third could live within a half-mile of high-capacity transit.
Only 6% of additional households are projected to live in the region’s highest-opportunity census tracts, which ARC defines through access to jobs, schools and amenities.
That makes location more than a planning preference. A home with a lower rent or purchase price can become expensive when it requires a long car commute, multiple vehicles, high fuel costs or limited access to child care and health services.
The strategy’s alternative growth scenario calls for directing more housing toward job centers and transit-accessible areas. But that approach will face familiar local questions: whether zoning allows enough homes, whether residents accept greater density, whether transit can support additional demand and who pays for water, roads, schools, drainage and emergency services.
A regional target still depends on local decisions
The Housing Forward 2035 strategy assigns production targets to all 11 counties. ARC says it will support and track progress, while local governments, developers, employers and other partners will be responsible for carrying out the work.
The November 12 agenda describes the county targets as part of a final presentation and adoption process. It also says ARC will outline recommended actions, implementation steps and progress tracking.
What the plan does not establish by itself is equally important. The public materials do not turn the targets into a statewide mandate, guarantee local zoning changes or identify complete funding packages for construction and preservation. Adoption will create a regional framework, but the practical authority will remain distributed among counties, cities, housing agencies, developers and lenders.
That fragmentation is both the reason for the strategy and its largest vulnerability. Housing demand crosses city and county lines, but land-use decisions, infrastructure budgets and approval processes remain largely local.
Preservation may be as important as construction
ARC has identified approximately 104,000 affordable units at risk of being lost through redevelopment, rising costs or other forms of upward pressure. Preserving those homes may be faster and less expensive than replacing them after they disappear, but preservation still requires financing, property owners willing to participate and long-term operating commitments.
The strategy also identifies approximately 106,000 vacant or underused properties as potential development opportunities, including about 1,530 publicly owned parcels. Those properties may offer useful locations for infill or redevelopment, but a vacant parcel is not the same thing as a buildable, financed project. Site conditions, ownership, utilities, environmental requirements and local approvals can determine whether an opportunity advances.
The same caution applies to public land. Government ownership may reduce acquisition costs, but it does not eliminate construction expenses, maintenance obligations or the need to connect a development to the surrounding community.
The number to watch is not 367,000
The most important number after Thursday’s meeting will be the number of homes that are actually completed and occupied at different income levels and in different locations.
Permits can be issued without construction. Construction can begin without producing affordable rents. A new subdivision can add units while increasing pressure on roads, schools and emergency services. A transit-oriented project can be near a station while remaining too expensive for the workers who need transit most.
ARC and local governments will need to report more than announcements. Residents should be able to see county-level production, completions, occupancy, affordability, preservation, infrastructure spending and access to jobs and transit. They should also be able to identify what happens when a county misses its target or when a promised funding source does not arrive.
Metro Atlanta’s housing strategy is important because it recognizes that the region cannot solve a regional housing problem through isolated local decisions. But recognition is only the first step.
The real test begins after the target is adopted: whether local governments accept housing near opportunity, whether affordable homes are preserved before they are lost, whether infrastructure is funded before growth arrives and whether the people counted in the plan can actually afford to live in the region it is designed to build.
